Alexander v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of. Berttbn. Tried before the Hon. Thos. Ai Walker». 1. The demurrer should have been sustained to both of the counts in the indictment for their uncertainty in the description of the road, for not keeping which in repair, &e. he was indicted. Such certainty should be observed in the description of offences as, 1st. To secure the defendant against the possibility of being put upon his trial for a different offence: 2d.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of. Berttbn. Tried before the Hon. Thos. Ai Walker». 1. The demurrer should have been sustained to both of the counts in the indictment for their uncertainty in the description of the road, for not keeping which in repair, &e. he was indicted. Such certainty should be observed in the description of offences as, 1st. To secure the defendant against the possibility of being put upon his trial for a different offence: 2d. That a conviction or acquittal will secure the defendant against a second prosecution for the same offence: 3d. That the defendant may know the…
1Opinion of the CourtParsons, J.
The plaintiff in error was indicted “ as overseer of a public road of the second grade, beginning at and leading from the twenty-third mile post to the county line,” within the county of Benton. The indictment has two counts describing the road substantially in the same language; and there was a general demurrer to 'each of the counts, which was overruled. It is now contended for theplaintiff in error ■ that this description is defective and uncertain, and that the demurrers should have been sustained. It is true, that there may have been different roads of the same grade, leading from the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State v. WithrowSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- State v. Southern Indiana Gas Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1907